Recommended Posts

Father-of-five Ade, like Raymond, is happy to detail his income and expenditure. But unlike unemployed Raymond, who has not worked for more than a decade, Ade works as a full-time systems analyst, on take-home pay of £20,592.

But because he and his wife Christine have a large family, including a child with autism, the couple are also entitled to a range of benefits that boosts their income to £40,874 a year.

Like millions of other British families they fund their lifestyle on a mixture of wages and benefits. And that means - despite Ade's relatively modest income (just above the UK median salary) - they are able to run two cars and take a low-cost annual holiday with their children.

The family's biggest outgoing is the mortgage on their home, a three-bedroom end-of-terrace. But, says Ade: "One day we will own it outright so it's not wasted money."

Ade says: "We live a very easy life. We are pretty happy with what we have."

Ade says he has no problem at all with claiming benefits that almost double his salary.

Ade used to work for the Benefits Agency in London and handled dozens of claims every year.

"Once I handled a claim from someone who had not worked in 18 years. It was then I decided to leave the agency," he says

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

BBC: "So the first article didn't get public support for the anti cuts brigade, now we've tried again".

Edit: Now I've read it, they get £20,592 in benefits. So they will not be affected by the cut; I'm not really sure what the article is trying to achieve apart from saying the cost of living is astronomical.

They also could save on the £5,980 they give to church, I don't disagree with this - just the amount as that's rather high!

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Too complicated to "replicate" their circumstances. I would just like to know what is means tested on the basis of having kids and what is based upon the disability. Obviously the DLA and carer's allowance are separate.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Don't smoke, don't drink, no SKY, no mobiles its like they tried acting on all the comments from last time

Quite, but if you add the charity and saving for a holiday that's £767 per calendar month in disposable income. I have to say that is rather good, and probably equivalent to my disposable income yet I'm single with no kids. That is with a much smaller monthly mortgage (nearly half the amount) and I earn about 35% more in net income.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Quite, but if you add the charity and saving for a holiday that's £767 per calendar month in disposable income. I have to say that is rather good, and probably equivalent to my disposable income yet I'm single with no kids. That is with a much smaller monthly mortgage (nearly half the amount) and I earn about 35% more in net income.

What I want to work out is that he takes home £400 a week but gets £286 of child related benefits (child benefit £68 and child tax credit £218)

From April 2013, someone taking home about £600 a week gets nothing, no matter how many kids they have.

So unless the disability element of the the child tax credit is more than half of the element there seem little point in earning more than the 30 grand or so he earns unless you earn far north of what? £60K?

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

What I want to work out is that he takes home £400 a week but gets £286 of child related benefits (child benefit £68 and child tax credit £218)

From April 2013, someone taking home about £600 a week gets nothing, no matter how many kids they have.

So unless the disability element of the the child tax credit is more than half of the element there seem little point in earning more than the 30 grand or so he earns unless you earn far north of what? £60K?

I'm in a similarish boat. Any pay rise I get from now will mean no more child-related tax credits iirc. I suspect that this might be deliberate - a lot of people must be refusing pay rises on this basis.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Father-of-five Ade, like Raymond, is happy to detail his income and expenditure. But unlike unemployed Raymond, who has not worked for more than a decade, Ade works as a full-time systems analyst, on take-home pay of £20,592.

But because he and his wife Christine have a large family, including a child with autism, the couple are also entitled to a range of benefits that boosts their income to £40,874 a year.

Like millions of other British families they fund their lifestyle on a mixture of wages and benefits. And that means - despite Ade's relatively modest income (just above the UK median salary) - they are able to run two cars and take a low-cost annual holiday with their children.

The family's biggest outgoing is the mortgage on their home, a three-bedroom end-of-terrace. But, says Ade: "One day we will own it outright so it's not wasted money."

Ade says: "We live a very easy life. We are pretty happy with what we have."

Ade says he has no problem at all with claiming benefits that almost double his salary.

Ade used to work for the Benefits Agency in London and handled dozens of claims every year.

"Once I handled a claim from someone who had not worked in 18 years. It was then I decided to leave the agency," he says

so you have to earn 60k pa to have same standard of life as somebody, who is earning 20k pa

Link to post

Share on other sites

Father-of-five Ade, like Raymond, is happy to detail his income and expenditure. But unlike unemployed Raymond, who has not worked for more than a decade, Ade works as a full-time systems analyst, on take-home pay of £20,592.

But because he and his wife Christine have a large family, including a child with autism, the couple are also entitled to a range of benefits that boosts their income to £40,874 a year.

Like millions of other British families they fund their lifestyle on a mixture of wages and benefits. And that means - despite Ade's relatively modest income (just above the UK median salary) - they are able to run two cars and take a low-cost annual holiday with their children.

The family's biggest outgoing is the mortgage on their home, a three-bedroom end-of-terrace. But, says Ade: "One day we will own it outright so it's not wasted money."

Ade says: "We live a very easy life. We are pretty happy with what we have."

Ade says he has no problem at all with claiming benefits that almost double his salary.

Ade used to work for the Benefits Agency in London and handled dozens of claims every year.

"Once I handled a claim from someone who had not worked in 18 years. It was then I decided to leave the agency," he says

Easy life - too right - breeding for income until you hit the jackpot and have a disabled (autism ?) kid. Benefits cap should be £26k incl net salary.

Wasting almost £6,000 a year on the kiddeee fyddlers organisation (i.e. the church). Take that off him - after all it's easy come easy go

£2950 for a disabled child pa, + a further £1190 if they are severely disabled.

Now, consider the fall in birth rate to younger mothers and the rise in the birth rate to older mothers. Consider the increase in the use of IVF, consider the increased likelihood of birth defects in older mothers and those using IVF. Consider the increasing amounts of disabled children being born to these older mothers. Consider the cost, but also consider the health of the future society.

Here is a quote from Polybius over 2200 years ago...

The fact is that the people of Hellas had entered the false path of ostentation, avarice and laziness, and were therefore becoming unwilling to marry, or, if they did marry, to bring up the children born to them; the majority were only willing to bring up at most one or two, in order to leave them wealthy and to spoil them in their childhood; and in consequence of all this the evil had been spreading rapidly before it was observed.

Where there are families of one or two children, of whom war claims one and disease the other for its victim, it is an evident and inevitable consequence that households should be left desolate and that states, precisely like beehives, should gradually lose their reserves and sink into impotence.

On this subject there is no need whatsoever to inquire of the gods as to how we are to be saved from the cancer. The plain man will answer that, first and foremost, we must save ourselves, either by changing our obsession or alternatively by making it illegal not to bring up every child that is born.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

so you have to earn 60k pa to have same standard of life as somebody, who is earning 20k pa

Am I the only one who thinks it is wrong ???

My salary is just over £60K and I've found it's pointless to earn anything above £44K so dump the excess into pension using salary sacrifice with the company contributing their NI savings. I can then keep the child benefit under the 2013 rules (£1700 net). My calculations show I can give up around £20K gross and get back £16K net. This lowers my effective (income/NI/benefit adjusted) marginal rate from 60+% to 20%.

I've done evening contract work in the past but if I do just one hour (from April 2012), I will lose the £1700 child benefit.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

£2950 for a disabled child pa, + a further £1190 if they are severely disabled.

Now, consider the fall in birth rate to younger mothers and the rise in the birth rate to older mothers. Consider the increase in the use of IVF, consider the increased likelihood of birth defects in older mothers and those using IVF. Consider the increasing amounts of disabled children being born to these older mothers. Consider the cost, but also consider the health of the future society.

Here is a quote from Polybius over 2200 years ago...

[/i][/size][/font][/color]

Thanks, I find Welfarese particularly obtuse.

Means that those differing incomes do balance out. Oh the choice to be poor with many kids or supporting yourself with few kids. They think its all over, it is now.